will he be giving the public back that shadowy £300,000.00 his father evaded for him or is this just a hollow trumpet stating that companies must say "oh we have company X in the Y and Z benefits, it evades tax but its all legal ok."

Well that's the point, it's not common practice. It's a practice which mostly benefits the privileged few.
As Leona Helmsley once famously summed it up, "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

ernie_lynch - Member
Well that's the point, it's not common practice. It's a practice which mostly benefits the privileged few.
As Leona Helmsley once famously summed it up, "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

Well that's the point, it's not common practice. It's a practice which mostly benefits the privileged few.
As Leona Helmsley once famously summed it up, "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

Was about to comment, then remembered my ISAs. Damn, I am immoral as the rest of them!! How very dare I shelter some of my savings legitimately from the tax man?

Its not really the same though is it? You're talking a few thousand a year, open to everyone, this is sheltering millions in a way that is only legal because they have not found a way to make it illegal... And the people in charge of making it illegal are doing it as well.

The difference between legal and illegal is just time.

The tax consultants just work faster than the inland revenue. They come up with the avoidance system (legal), the HMRC finds out, and clamps down so it becomes evasion (illegal).

jivehoneyjive - Member
Are you going to preach to us about austerity, whilst changing the laws in your favour as well?...

Sorry don't understand that?

Horatio - what is different? Seems to me the main difference is scale. So I shelter a more modest sum than Cameron, Hodge [insert name of most MPS probably] etc via an ISA and they [may} do the same in greater scale via other legal methods. So who is more immoral? How does scale become the only moral arbiter - as one can easily argue that an ISA is not available to all?

I am not defending CMD in any way - as with Hodge, there is a healthy smack of hypocrisy in his and others' positions. But since I am doing effectively the same, albeit on a micro scale in relation to the reported numbers here, it is hardly fair for me to cast the first stone! Perfectly fair, for those that don't minimise their tax burden to have a good crack though...

Well, the biggest difference is certainly scale, and in this case that certainly does make it immoral. The tax is supposed to be paid by all companies. Smaller ones can no longer compete. blah blah etc.. Money makes money, and some taxes are designed to counter that so wealth inequality does not get out of control. When people/companies pay less tax as they get richer, the opposite happens.

Legal tax dodges (such as ISA's and Cycle to Work scheme) are usually done to encourage desirable behaviour, like saving up (a relatively small amount) of money for a rainy day, or cycling to work. These are often encouraged to benefit the wider society, by making sure people are less reliant on the state, or in better health and so on.

HoratioHufnagel - Member
These are often encouraged to benefit the wider society, by making sure people are less reliant on the state, or in better health and so on.

Fine, well take this to its logical extenstion. A father uses legal methods to ensure that his family is less/not reliant on the state and therefore not a burden or drain on scarce resources. So that is ok, by your argument - correct? So at want point in the amount scale does that become immoral. In essence, that is what both CMD's dad and I am doing just on significantly different scales (sadly) and via different instruments/methods.

Not at all - the tax on tobacco is a "sin tax" designed to stop doing things. Legal tax shelters as Horatio stated earlier have (among other things) the intention of encouraging positive behaviour eg, saving or investment. So a MNC may be given a rent holiday or other financial incentives to locate in the depressed part of the UK. Such incentives may not be available to all including smaller scale companies. Since scale seems to be an important issue here - is that immoral?

Doesnt stop politicians being hypocrites on this issue. But for the rest of us: Matthew 7:3 ( ) is worth bearing in mind even if the speck and the log are interchanged here!!